Re: [asa] (testing evolution) TE/EC Response - ideology according to Terry

First, a clarification: I am using the term "forensic science" in a
broad sense, synonymous with "historical" or "origins" science. This
is how YECs generally use the term [e.g. "Historical or Origins
science (sometimes called forensic science)", http://www.icr.edu/
prospective/].

"Forensic" or "historical" science relies on instruments and
observations just as much as "experimental" science. The
observations are generalized into theories. (As you yourself wrote
today, "Cosmology is a well-thought out theory...")

CBR observations from Penzias & Wilson to COBE to WMAP are good
examples. Their generalizations have led to two Nobel prizes. The
instruments for such cosmological observations are often called
"experiments."

CBR measurements could be viewed as BOTH "forensic/historical" and
"experimental" science. Due to the finite speed of light we can make
present-day observations of the early universe. This demonstrates,
as George said below, that there is no qualitative distinction
between "forensic/historical" and "experimental" science.

Kirk

On Jul 21, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Alexanian, Moorad wrote:

> Experimental scientists do experiments that can be generalized into
> laws of Nature. What experiments do forensic scientists do? What
> are the generalizations in forensics science? I cannot think of any
> besides profiling.
>
> Moorad
> ________________________________________
> From: Kirk Bertsche [Bertsche@aol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:42 PM
> To: George Murphy
> Cc: Alexanian, Moorad; Iain Strachan; Dehler, Bernie; ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) TE/EC Response - ideology
> according to Terry
>
> I agree with George's perspective: the distinction between
> "experimental" and "forensic" science is wrong-headed. I do not hear
> scientists making this distinction; it seems to come from non-
> scientists who wish to reject the conclusions of "forensic" science
> while accepting "experimental" science.
>
> This distinction often comes with some assumptions, e.g.
> 1) "forensic" science relies on observations which are more indirect
> and more inferential than "experimental" science, so "forensic"
> science is less reliable
> 2) "forensic" science can only rely on "extant physical data"; new
> experiments and new data are not possible
>
> Neither assumption is true, in general. Some "experimental" science
> (e.g. particle physics) is even more indirect and inferential than
> much of "forensic" science. "Forensic" science allows for new
> observations of the past to test theories. Furthermore, with newer
> and better telescopes we can look back further in time and gather new
> "forensic" data.
>
> Kirk
>
>
> On Jul 21, 2009, at 10:55 AM, George Murphy wrote:
>
>> For starters, I think that your characterization of forensic
>> science is wrong. Forensic scientists do not simply "suppose a
>> scenario." They collect physical evidence from a scene and from
>> it, using theories with some degree of support, try to reconstruct
>> events.
>>
>> More broadly, the whole attempt to distinguish sharply
>> "experimental" from "historical," "forensic" &c science is wrong.
>> Of course there are differences but they are differences of degree,
>> not clear-cut qualitative distinctions.
>>
>> Shalom
>> George
>> http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexanian, Moorad"
>> <alexanian@uncw.edu>
>> To: "Iain Strachan" <igd.strachan@gmail.com>; "Dehler, Bernie"
>> <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
>> Cc: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 11:53 AM
>> Subject: RE: [asa] (testing evolution) TE/EC Response - ideology
>> according to Terry
>>
>>
>>> Many of us have often said that evolutionary theory is more akin
>>> to forensic science than to experimental science. Recall that for
>>> all the data that was presented in the O.J. Simpson trial, the
>>> jury did reach the wrong verdict. This may also be the case for
>>> those investigating the past with regard to the question of
>>> origins. In forensic science, one supposes a scenario and attempts
>>> to prove it with extant physical data. People have to recognize
>>> the true nature of evolutionary theory and stop comparing it to
>>> theories that are used in the experimental sciences.
>>>
>>> Moorad
>>> ________________________________________
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jul 21 22:55:26 2009